Health Politics is committed to the highest standards of ethical conduct in scholarly publishing. This Publishing Ethics Policy sets out the principles and responsibilities that govern the preparation, submission, review, publication, and post-publication management of manuscripts. By submitting, reviewing, or editing work for Health Politics, all parties agree to comply with these standards, which are informed by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Duties of Editors

Editors are responsible for fair, timely, and unbiased editorial decisions based on the scholarly merit of the work and its relevance to the journal’s scope. Editors will maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and peer review materials and will not use unpublished information for personal advantage. Editors must disclose and manage competing interests and recuse themselves where appropriate; submissions involving editors or close collaborators will be handled through an independent process. Editors do not request citations for improper reasons (e.g., to increase metrics) and will take reasonable steps to identify and address suspected misconduct and to correct the record when needed.

Health Politics maintains editorial independence. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit and relevance to the journal’s scope and will not be influenced by commercial, institutional, or personal interests. Where applicable, the journal will transparently describe its governance structure and any relationship to a sponsoring organization or publisher.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely reviews and to treat manuscripts as confidential documents. Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest and decline review when a conflict exists or when they cannot provide an informed assessment. Reviewers must not share, use, or disclose manuscript content for personal advantage and must not upload non-public manuscripts or peer review materials to external tools or services in ways that compromise confidentiality. Reviewers should raise concerns to the editors if they suspect overlap, plagiarism, data or image irregularities, unethical research, or other integrity issues. Any citation suggestions should be relevant and justified, and reviewers should not recommend citations for self-serving or metric-related purposes.

Reviewers must not use AI tools on non-public manuscripts unless explicitly permitted by the journal and only where confidentiality can be ensured.

Originality and Duplicate Submission

Manuscripts must represent original work that has not been published previously and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Redundant or duplicate publication, including the submission of substantially similar manuscripts to more than one journal, is not permitted. Appropriate citation and acknowledgment of all sources must be provided. When prior dissemination exists (e.g., preprints, theses, or conference abstracts), authors must disclose this at submission and ensure that the manuscript is substantially consistent with ethical and copyright requirements.

Preprints: Authors must disclose at submission whether a manuscript (or closely related version) has been posted as a preprint and provide the link/DOI. If cited, preprints should be clearly identified as preprints; where a peer-reviewed version exists, authors should cite the published version.

Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, data acquisition, analysis or interpretation, and drafting or revising the manuscript. All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. All listed authors share collective responsibility for the integrity of the work. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is accurate, that all authors meet authorship criteria, and that required disclosures are complete. Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors must be justified and agreed in writing by all authors and are subject to editorial approval.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

All authors must disclose any financial or non-financial relationships that could be perceived as potential conflicts of interest. Sources of funding and the role of the funder in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and manuscript preparation must be transparently reported. Editors and reviewers must also disclose relevant competing interests and recuse themselves where appropriate.

Research Ethics and Informed Consent

Research involving human participants or animals must have received appropriate ethical approval from a recognized institutional review board or ethics committee and must be conducted in accordance with applicable ethical standards and regulations. Informed consent must be obtained where required, and relevant ethics approval and consent statements must be included in the manuscript. Authors must ensure appropriate protections for privacy, confidentiality, and vulnerable populations, as applicable.

Data Integrity and Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate and complete account of the work performed and its results. Data fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation is unacceptable. Sufficient methodological detail should be provided to allow replication where feasible. Authors should retain original data and be prepared to provide access to data or materials upon reasonable request for editorial review or verification, subject to ethical, legal, or confidentiality constraints. Where data cannot be shared publicly, authors should explain the restriction and describe how qualified researchers may obtain access where feasible.

Plagiarism and Proper Attribution

Plagiarism in any form, including the unattributed use of text, data, ideas, or images, is unethical and unacceptable. All sources must be properly cited, and appropriate permissions must be obtained for the reuse of copyrighted material. The journal also prohibits practices that distort the scholarly record, including citation manipulation and attempts to manipulate the peer review process.

Image and Figure Integrity

Figures and images must accurately represent the original data. Inappropriate image manipulation that alters the interpretation of results is prohibited. Any adjustments must be applied uniformly and disclosed where relevant. Authors may be asked to provide original, unprocessed image files or supporting materials for editorial verification.

Inclusive and Respectful Editorial and Review Practices

Editors and reviewers are expected to uphold inclusive and respectful scholarly practices. Editorial decisions and peer review should be based solely on the intellectual merit of the work and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without discrimination based on authors’ personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, geographic location, career stage, or disciplinary background. Editors and reviewers should be attentive to language, framing, and imagery that may perpetuate bias, stereotyping, or stigma and may request revisions where necessary to promote clarity, accuracy, and respect for individuals and populations discussed.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

If artificial intelligence–based tools are used in manuscript preparation (e.g., for language editing or data analysis), their use must be transparently disclosed. AI tools may not be listed as authors and do not replace the authors’ responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the manuscript. Authors remain accountable for ensuring that AI-assisted content is free of plagiarism and fabricated or incorrect citations and that the use of AI tools does not compromise confidentiality or intellectual property.

Health Politics is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. The following policies describe how the journal handles complaints and appeals, allegations of misconduct, intellectual property, post-publication discussion, and integrity safeguards.

Complaints and Appeals

Health Politics takes complaints and appeals seriously and seeks to ensure fair, timely, and respectful resolution.

Complaints may relate to editorial processes, peer review conduct, communication, delays, ethical concerns, or post-publication issues. Appeals may request reconsideration of an editorial decision.

• ● How to submit: Complaints or appeals should be submitted in writing to the journal office and include the manuscript or article title, manuscript ID (if available), a clear description of the concern, and any supporting evidence or documentation.
• ● Initial review: The Editor-in-Chief (or a designated senior editor) will acknowledge receipt and conduct an initial assessment. When appropriate, the journal may request additional information from the complainant, authors, editors, or reviewers.
• ● Appeals criteria: Appeals are considered when there is evidence of a material factual error, a procedural irregularity, or important new information that was not available at the time of decision. Disagreement with editorial judgment alone is not sufficient grounds for appeal.
• ● Independence and conflicts: Appeals will be reviewed by an editor who was not involved in the original decision whenever feasible. Editors with a potential conflict of interest will recuse themselves.
• ● Outcome: The journal will communicate the outcome in writing. Decisions on appeals are final.

Unprofessional, abusive, or harassing communications may result in the journal limiting or terminating correspondence.

Process for Allegations of Research Misconduct

Health Politics does not tolerate research misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate image manipulation, redundant publication, citation manipulation, or manipulation of the peer review process. The journal follows established best practices for handling allegations and will take appropriate corrective action to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Reporting concerns
Concerns about possible misconduct may be raised by editors, reviewers, readers, or institutions. Reports should include as much detail as possible and any supporting evidence.

Assessment and investigation
When an allegation is received, the journal will generally proceed as follows:

• 1. Preliminary assessment: The Editor-in-Chief (or designated editor) conducts an initial review to determine whether the concern is credible and within scope.
• 2. Confidentiality and record-keeping: The journal will handle allegations as confidentially as possible while ensuring a fair process and maintaining appropriate documentation.
• 3. Author notification and response: Authors will typically be informed of the concern and given an opportunity to respond and provide clarification or supporting materials.
• 4. Verification steps (as applicable): The journal may use similarity screening, image checks, requests for underlying data/materials, and review of submission and peer review records to assess integrity.
• 5. Institutional involvement: In serious cases, or when the journal cannot resolve concerns based on available information, the journal may contact the authors’ institution(s), ethics committee(s), or funder(s) for further investigation.

Outcomes and remedies
Depending on the findings and the stage of publication, outcomes may include (but are not limited to): rejection, publication of a correction, publication of an expression of concern, retraction, or other measures necessary to safeguard the scholarly record. In cases of severe or repeated misconduct, the journal may decline future submissions for a defined period.

Intellectual Property

Health Politics respects intellectual property rights and expects authors to do the same.

• ● Copyright and licensing: Authors must ensure that the manuscript content can be lawfully published and that any required permissions have been obtained prior to publication.
• ● Third-party content: Reuse of copyrighted text, figures, tables, images, instruments, or substantial extracts requires appropriate permission and acknowledgment unless the material is clearly licensed for reuse. Authors are responsible for securing permissions and providing documentation upon request.
• ● Proper attribution: All sources must be cited accurately. Misappropriation of others’ work, including unattributed paraphrasing or reuse of images/data, is unacceptable.
• ● Infringement claims: If the journal receives a credible claim of copyright or other intellectual property infringement, it may investigate and, where appropriate, take corrective action, which can include correction, removal of infringing material, or retraction.

Post-Publication Discussion and Updates to the Record

Health Politics supports constructive post-publication dialogue and will consider relevant concerns raised after publication.

• ● Reader correspondence: The journal may publish letters, commentaries, or other responses that engage with published work, subject to editorial review, relevance, and standards of respectful discourse.
• ● Raising concerns: Readers who identify potential errors or integrity issues should contact the journal with specific details and supporting evidence where possible.
• ● Editorial action: Substantiated concerns may lead to editorial actions such as a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, consistent with the journal’s corrections and misconduct processes.
• ● Transparency: Where action is taken, the journal will aim to ensure that notices are clearly linked to the original article and that the publication record remains transparent.

Integrity Safeguards

To protect research integrity and maintain trust in the scholarly record, Health Politics may employ the following safeguards during editorial assessment and peer review:

• ● Plagiarism and duplication screening: The journal may screen submissions for overlap with published and unpublished sources.
• ● Image integrity checks: The journal may assess figures for inappropriate manipulation or inconsistencies.
• ● Data and methods transparency: Authors may be asked to provide additional methodological details or underlying data/materials for editorial verification, consistent with ethical and legal constraints.
• ● Citation integrity: The journal does not permit citation manipulation, including coercive citation requests, citation cartels, or practices intended to inappropriately inflate citation metrics.
• ● Peer review integrity: The journal prohibits attempts to manipulate peer review (e.g., falsified reviewer identities or undisclosed conflicts). Where concerns arise, the journal may verify reviewer identities and review peer review records.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Health Politics will take appropriate post-publication action to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record. When errors or integrity concerns are substantiated, the journal may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction, as appropriate. Authors have a responsibility to promptly notify the journal editor if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work and to cooperate with reasonable requests related to corrections or other updates to the record.

Corrections will be issued promptly with a clearly labeled notice that cites the original article. When applicable to online publication, the journal may post an updated version with a dated description of changes, archive prior versions, and ensure earlier versions indicate that a newer version exists; citations should refer to the most recent version.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The journal’s publication ethics standards are informed by the COPE Core Practices and the ICMJE Recommendations. The journal applies relevant guidance on a case-by-case basis consistent with its scope and disciplinary norms.